Ministry of Justice

The Director General of Operations for HM Prison and Probation Service responded to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report following the inquest into the death of Christine McDonald on 26 July 2024. The response is available on the Chief Coroner’s website.

HMPPS is now preparing a response to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Death report.

We have introduced a period of enhanced management assurance for all external escorts. Under these strengthened measures, a manager of the same grade or a more senior grade is required to check the application of restraints prior to an escort and ensure additional restraint arrangements are utilised where necessary. In addition, all operational staff who may be involved in an escort have been required to complete refreshed competency activity.

The High Court has been clear that the making of an injunction to grant lifelong anonymity to protect the identity of a now adult person convicted of a serious offence as a child, should be exceptional. In practice, such injunctions are made very rarely.

The court will consider whether there is a real and immediate risk of serious physical harm or death or if the offender’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights justify making the injunction as a necessary and proportionate step. In doing so the court will balance these factors against the right of the media and others to freedom of expression.

An application can be made to the High Court to end an injunction. To be successful, it must be demonstrated that the conditions justifying the making of the injunction are no longer in place.

This Government has no current plans to establish periodic review procedures for these injunctions.

The Prevention of Future Deaths report following the death of Stephen Sleaford was addressed to the Lord Chancellor and the Minister of State for Prisons. The Director General of Operations for HM Prison and Probation Service responded on their behalf because the matters of concern raised in the report were of an operational nature.

No separate response from the Ministry of Justice is considered necessary.

The Director General of Operations for HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) responded to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report following the inquest into the death on 20 January 2025. This response addressed the matters of concern raised in the report and a separate response from the prison was not considered necessary. For reasons that are not clear, whilst it is dated 11 June 2024, the report was not received by HMPPS until November 2024, and the response was then provided promptly.

The Director General of Operations for HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) responded to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report following the inquest into the death of Daniel Beckford on 8 January 2025. This response addressed the matters of concern raised in the report and a separate response from the prison was not considered necessary. For reasons that are not clear, whilst it is dated 11 June 2024, the report was not received by HMPPS until November 2024, and the response was then provided promptly.

An initial response to the public consultation is due to be published in April, followed by a full report on the consultation in late summer 2026. This report will include all formal responses to the consultation, and the names of the organisations that responded.

The Director General of Operations for HM Prison and Probation Service responded to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report following the inquest into the death of Christopher MacGillivray in August 2024. This response addresses the matters of concern raised in the report.

The Ministry of Justice sent a preliminary reply, making a point of clarification, to the HM Senior Coroner for Greater Manchester on 3 October 2024, following the Prevention of Future Death report issued after the death of Hayley Cowan. No further action has been requested of the Department at this time.

The formal investigation into the circumstances surrounding the escape from custody is due to be completed by 20 March.

Reports of internal investigations of this nature are not normally published.

The formal investigation into the circumstances surrounding the escape from custody is due to be completed by 20 March.

Reports of internal investigations of this nature are not normally published.

I would like to extend my deepest sympathies to all parents bereaved by baby loss. Bereavement is never easy, but the loss of a child is unimaginable, and we recognise the profound and lifelong impact this has on parents and families.

As I have previously set out in correspondence with the Right Honourable Member, the wider landscape of maternity investigations has continued to evolve since the publication of the consultation on the coronial investigation of stillbirths in 2019 and the factual summary of responses published in 2023.

Most recently, this Government commissioned the independent investigation into NHS maternity and neonatal care led by Baroness Amos. As outlined in the investigation’s terms of reference, it will, amongst other issues, look to consider the potential role of coroners in the investigation of late term stillbirths (37 weeks or later).

The Department has not made a formal assessment of the delay in publishing a decision in this area. It is important that the Government’s published position on coronial investigations of stillbirths is informed by any findings and relevant recommendations the independent investigation makes, and more broadly supports the most effective model for maternity investigation, including on vital issues such as learning and accountability. We intend to communicate our position on this issue after the investigation has published its final report in June 2026.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the SRA’s performance to ensure it operates effectively and in the public interest, including through performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing supervisory engagement. As the minister with responsibility for legal services I meet regularly with the SRA to hold it to account for its performance and am happy to rase the issue of waiting times for complaint resolutions at future meetings.

Where allegations of solicitor misconduct are raised with the SRA, it assesses the complaint to determine whether it meets the threshold for formal investigation. The SRA publishes information about its performance, including data on the timeliness of investigations and enforcement activity, through its corporate reporting and Board papers. It has reported an increase in complaints about solicitor misconduct and has taken steps to manage this, including increasing investigative resource and seeking to improve the quality and timeliness of its investigation work.

Within the framework of regulatory independence, Ministers and officials in the Ministry of Justice engage frequently with the SRA on matters relating to the regulatory framework. This has included engagement on the steps the SRA is taking to improve the timeliness of its investigations.

On 9 June 2025, the Government announced a balanced package of measures to strengthen independent regulation of the enforcement sector to protect people in debt, whilst ensuring fair and effective enforcement. As part of this package, reforms to the Taking Control of Goods Procedure will be made to improve the experience of those facing enforcement action, as well as uplifting the enforcement fees High Court Enforcement Officers can charge to support sector sustainability.

The Government intends to bring forward legislation to implement these reforms when parliamentary time allows.

The Government has agreed that when the UK participates in an EU instrument, programme or other activity, the UK will make a fair financial contribution to cover the costs of our participation. No decisions have yet been taken as to whether the UK will make additional financial contributions to the European Union as a consequence of the new provisions set out in the Common Understanding of 19 May 2025 on a) reinforced law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and (b) judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters.

Any decisions on such matters will be assessed in accordance with Government Accounting Officer rules, including value for money. The UK Government remains committed to close and effective collaboration with EU and EFTA countries in these matters.

The Ministry of Justice has published information about the impacts of the IRCC measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill, in the IRCC Impact Assessment (Courts and Tribunals Bill (Structural Criminal Court) Impact Assessment). This includes the impacts of re-allocating cases in the open caseload to the Crown Court Bench Division and judge-alone trials for technical and lengthy cases.

The package of measures is estimated to reduce incoming demand on the Crown Court by the equivalent of around 27,000 sitting days in 2028/29. These changes are annual and continue into future years. In 2028/29 a further one-off gain of c. 3,500 Crown Court sitting days will accrue from changing mode of trial on cases already in the Crown Court open caseload from jury trial to trial by judge alone (either under the Crown Court Bench Division or on grounds of technicality or length). The modelling of this gain takes into account the time needed to review open cases when re-allocating cases.

The Ministry of Justice has published information about the impacts of the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts (IRCC) measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill, in the IRCC Impact Assessment (Courts and Tribunals Bill (Structural Criminal Court) Impact Assessment). This includes the impacts of re-allocating cases in the open caseload to the Crown Court Bench Division and judge-alone trials for technical and lengthy cases to cases.

Sir Brian’s Review gave a ‘conservative’ estimate that trials without a jury will make hearings at least 20% faster. This assumption was reached through quantitative analysis and workshops with HMCTS operational experts and engagement with judges. The Impact Assessment details the methodology used to reach this estimate. The assumption is also consistent with international evidence: data from New South Wales shows an average 16% reduction in trial length for judge-only trials, rising to around 29% for complex cases.

The package of reforms in the Courts and Tribunals Bill are designed to free up Crown Court capacity so that the most serious cases can be put before a jury more quickly, reducing delays for victims and witnesses.

The Ministry of Justice has published information about the impacts of the IRCC measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill, in the IRCC Impact Assessment (Courts and Tribunals Bill (Structural Criminal Court) Impact Assessment). This includes the impacts of re-allocating cases in the open caseload to the Crown Court Bench Division or judge-alone for technical and lengthy cases. Re-allocation of these cases may be done on the papers, ie without a hearing.

The package of measures is estimated to reduce incoming demand on the Crown Court by the equivalent of around 27,000 sitting days in 2028/29. These changes are annual and continue into future years. In 2028/29 a further one-off gain of c. 3,500 Crown Court sitting days will accrue from changing mode of trial on cases already in the Crown Court open caseload from jury trial to trial by judge alone (either under the Crown Court Bench Division or on grounds of technicality or length). The modelling of this gain takes into account the time needed to review open cases when re-allocating cases.

There will be no right to appeal against an allocation decision or order made to hear a trial by judge alone. Parliament has long held that decisions about mode of trial (e.g., allocation decisions in the magistrates’ court) are not normally subject to appeal given the need for procedural finality and avoiding delay in cases.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) works to ensure its facilities comply with equalities law, in relation to the interpretation of sex under the Equality Act 2010.

HMCTS is presently awaiting updated cross-government guidance from the Office for Equality and Opportunity.

The Independent Sentencing Review (ISR) published its findings on 22 May 2025, and the previous Lord Chancellor welcomed the recommendations and accepted the majority of them in principle. The Sentencing Act takes forward many of the ISR recommendations and it received royal assent on 22 January, and the first tranche of measures will come into effect on 22 March. We are continuing to consider how we take forward the ISR's recommendations that do not require legislation.

The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:

The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025

The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.

The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.

Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.

For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament

The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:

The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025

The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.

The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.

Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.

For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament

The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:

The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025

The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.

The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.

Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.

For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament

Enhancing our bilateral prisoner transfer capability is a government priority. We remain fully committed to transferring eligible foreign national offenders from the UK so they can serve the remainder of their sentences in their home country, and to repatriating British nationals imprisoned overseas.

Compulsory bilateral agreements

The UK has compulsory bilateral prisoner transfer agreements (PTAs) with Albania, Ghana, Libya, Nigeria and Rwanda. These agreements state that the consent of the prisoner is not required for transfer, although both States must agree to the transfer. The UK has also recently signed a compulsory bilateral PTA with Italy, which is currently undergoing parliamentary scrutiny and has not yet been ratified.

Voluntary bilateral agreements

The UK also has voluntary bilateral PTAs, where the consent of the prisoner to transfer is required in addition to the agreement of both States, with the following countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Brazil, Cuba, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, the Philippines, India, Iraq, Laos, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Peru, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Thailand and Vietnam.

Multilateral arrangements

The UK has multilateral prisoner transfer arrangements with all States that are party to the 1983 Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. This includes:

• All 27 European Union Member States.

• NonEU Council of Europe members: Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Türkiye and Ukraine.

• Non‑Council of Europe States (as the Convention is also open to non‑Council of Europe members): Australia, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Ghana, Honduras, India, Israel, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Panama, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Russia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, the United States of America and Venezuela.

The UK also participates in the Scheme for the Transfer of Convicted Offenders within the Commonwealth, which provides prisoner transfer arrangements with: Kenya, Malawi, Maldives, Botswana, Tonga and Uganda.

This information is published in Table 1_A_21 of the Offender Management Statistics ‘annual’ prison population tables.

As of 30 June 2025, the most recent date for which statistics are available, 79 of those in custody described their ethnicity as Roma.

To note, the ‘Roma’ ethnicity code is a recent addition to the prison offender management system, and the ‘as at 30 June 2025’ data is the first publication of these figures. As such, we would expect numbers to increase over time as new prisoners entering the system are able to self-identify as ‘Roma’.

The National Year of Reading is a welcome opportunity to promote a wide range of activity to improve literacy and engagement with reading for people in custody and on probation.

As part of this work we have appointed the first ever Prison Reading Laureate, the author Lee Child. He will champion the transformative power of reading across the criminal justice system, continue expansion of his successful literacy pilot programme which has been running in a number of prisons since 2025 and will bring in more authors to work with prisons across the country, promoting the benefits of reading to rehabilitation.

Reading is a priority for HMPPS who work with many voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations such as the Reading Agency and National Literacy Trust. A programme of work is planned throughout this year to improve national access to books and facilitate workshops with authors. The Youth Custody Service is also launching its first ever Literacy Festival to inspire reading amongst some of the most complex children in our society.

Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.

There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.

The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.

Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.

There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.

The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.

Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.

There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.

The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.

Officials from the Ministry of Justice regularly attend meetings to discuss matters of national security, defence and resilience as well as the associated public communications required to deliver these lines of efforts. The conversation on National Defence was a recommendation in the 2025 Strategic Defence Review (SDR), which the Government accepted. The Ministry of Defence is the lead department for delivering the SDR, with support from the Cabinet Office, and particularly from the National Security Secretariat.

As set out in the Strategic Defence Review, the national conversation will be a multi-year, cross-departmental effort designed to deliver on the whole-of-society approach to national security and defence allowing Government, the private sector and public to play their part in strengthening the UK’s resilience to any potential future shocks. This work addresses the risks and threats the UK faces, including those below and above the threshold of an armed attack.

The Ministry of Justice is actively supporting this work and regularly fields senior officials from across the Department, including the Permanent Secretary, to cross-government meetings on a range of issues, including national security, resilience and defence.

The new independent reporting channel may consider allegations of bullying, harassment, discrimination, sexual harassment or assault, or cases where serious safeguarding concerns are raised. Complaints may be upheld, partially upheld or not upheld, or mediation between parties may be recommended.

A number of cases are still being investigated. As we are still in the process of putting in place a system for analysing data relating to complaints made through the new reporting channel, it is not possible to provide the requested information at this stage.

A difference in figures reported by the Department for periods 5 July 2024 to 29 April 2025 and 5 July 2024 to 5 December 2025 is due to a difference in how incident records were queried and displayed, resulting in an inflated figure of 665 where some devices had been double counted.

The correct figure for the period of 5 July 2024 to 5 December 2025 is 324.

The Department is currently undertaking work to improve asset data quality, during which some devices previously been reported lost or stolen have been since recovered or identified as having been reported in error.

Obtaining the information requested relating to possible miscommunications with respect to person escort records would require each prison to undertake a manual search of all such records for the period in question. That could not be undertaken without incurring disproportionate cost.

When a prisoner arrives in prison reception, risk assessment procedures are carried out in accordance with HM Prison and Probation Service’s current policy frameworks. During the reception process, staff review all available documentation, including the person escort record, and any existing Digital Prison Service alerts, as well as undertaking an observational assessment of the prisoner’s presentation and behaviour. A structured reception screening is then carried out by both operational and healthcare staff, to identify any risks relating to suicide or self-harm, violence, vulnerability, physical or mental health issues, or other safeguarding concerns. In addition, a cell-sharing risk assessment (CSRA) is completed for all prisoners new to custody, to identify whether they would be likely to cause serious harm to another prisoner if they were to share a cell. When a prisoner is transferred, their CSRA accompanies them. If the CSRA cannot be located at the time of transfer, a new assessment is undertaken to ensure that risks are appropriately identified.

The processes relating to capturing and transferring risk management information are set out in the Person Escort Record Policy Framework. The framework is currently being reviewed: this will help to capture a broader range of risk information, and support more accurate and consistent completion of the form.

Obtaining the information requested relating to possible miscommunications with respect to person escort records would require each prison to undertake a manual search of all such records for the period in question. That could not be undertaken without incurring disproportionate cost.

When a prisoner arrives in prison reception, risk assessment procedures are carried out in accordance with HM Prison and Probation Service’s current policy frameworks. During the reception process, staff review all available documentation, including the person escort record, and any existing Digital Prison Service alerts, as well as undertaking an observational assessment of the prisoner’s presentation and behaviour. A structured reception screening is then carried out by both operational and healthcare staff, to identify any risks relating to suicide or self-harm, violence, vulnerability, physical or mental health issues, or other safeguarding concerns. In addition, a cell-sharing risk assessment (CSRA) is completed for all prisoners new to custody, to identify whether they would be likely to cause serious harm to another prisoner if they were to share a cell. When a prisoner is transferred, their CSRA accompanies them. If the CSRA cannot be located at the time of transfer, a new assessment is undertaken to ensure that risks are appropriately identified.

The processes relating to capturing and transferring risk management information are set out in the Person Escort Record Policy Framework. The framework is currently being reviewed: this will help to capture a broader range of risk information, and support more accurate and consistent completion of the form.

Obtaining the information requested relating to possible miscommunications with respect to person escort records would require each prison to undertake a manual search of all such records for the period in question. That could not be undertaken without incurring disproportionate cost.

When a prisoner arrives in prison reception, risk assessment procedures are carried out in accordance with HM Prison and Probation Service’s current policy frameworks. During the reception process, staff review all available documentation, including the person escort record, and any existing Digital Prison Service alerts, as well as undertaking an observational assessment of the prisoner’s presentation and behaviour. A structured reception screening is then carried out by both operational and healthcare staff, to identify any risks relating to suicide or self-harm, violence, vulnerability, physical or mental health issues, or other safeguarding concerns. In addition, a cell-sharing risk assessment (CSRA) is completed for all prisoners new to custody, to identify whether they would be likely to cause serious harm to another prisoner if they were to share a cell. When a prisoner is transferred, their CSRA accompanies them. If the CSRA cannot be located at the time of transfer, a new assessment is undertaken to ensure that risks are appropriately identified.

The processes relating to capturing and transferring risk management information are set out in the Person Escort Record Policy Framework. The framework is currently being reviewed: this will help to capture a broader range of risk information, and support more accurate and consistent completion of the form.

In response to all reports by HM Inspectorate of Prison and HM Inspectorate of Probation, H M Prison and Probation Service is required to produce a formal action plan, which is published on the GOV.UK website, to address concerns raised and recommendations made by the Inspectorate.

Learning taken from Inspection reports directly informs policy review and development, and positive practice identified in reports is shared across the agency. Robust internal measures are in place to assure senior leaders that appropriate action is taken where lessons are identified.

We recognise that illicit drug use in prison is too high, and are committed to tackling this to improve safety, support rehabilitation and reduce reoffending. We are investing over £40 million in physical security measures across 34 prisons this financial year, including £10 million on anti-drone measures, to help prevent drugs entering prison.

We work closely with health partners to identify prisoners with a drug problem and support them into treatment. To create the environment and incentives for prisoners to make the right choices, we have funded Incentivised Substance Free Living Units in 85 prisons, which provide a dedicated, supportive environment for any prisoner who wants to live drug-free in prison, using regular drug testing alongside incentives. We are also working to increase access to mutual aid fellowships in prison, which can provide vital ongoing support for people in recovery.

To bring together rehabilitative and security focused activity in custody, we have funded 54 Drug Strategy Leads to ensure local drug strategies are effectively implemented, and to coordinate a whole system approach to tackling drugs. We have also recruited 17 new Group Drug and Alcohol Leads, who support work on drugs and alcohol across their prison groups, and establish links with community providers and local authority partnerships.

The Ministry of Justice is committed to supporting rehabilitation through high-quality education, skills and work activities. National funding for prison education has not been reduced. Inflationary pressures have affected the proportion of the overall budget that can be spent on the Core Education contracts, and this has led to reductions in the volume of delivery that prisons are able to commission. This represents just one element of the wider education, skills and work offer that prisoners are able to access and Governors retain the flexibility to commission provision that best meets the needs of their prison population.

We continue to monitor delivery closely through HMPPS contract management arrangements. In addition, a full evaluation of the new Prisoner Education Service is underway to assess the impact of education provision on prisoner progress and rehabilitation outcomes, and to inform future policy and commissioning decisions.

I refer the noble Lord to the answer I gave to question PQ HL 14560 to Lord Weir on 23 February 2026.

The National Year of Reading is a welcome opportunity to promote a wide range of activity to improve literacy and engagement with reading for people in custody and on probation.

As part of this work we have appointed the first ever Prison Reading Laureate, the author Lee Child. He will champion the transformative power of reading across the criminal justice system, continue expansion of his successful literacy pilot programme which has been running in a number of prisons since 2025 and will bring in more authors to work with prisons across the country, promoting the benefits of reading to rehabilitation.

Reading is a priority for HMPPS who work with many voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations such as the Reading Agency and National Literacy Trust. A programme of work is planned throughout this year to improve national access to books and facilitate workshops with authors. The Youth Custody Service is also launching its first ever Literacy Festival to inspire reading amongst some of the most complex children in our society.

All learners at HMP Berwyn are entitled to access their education through the medium of Welsh should they choose to do so and are asked their language preference on arrival at the prison, and during their education induction. Although take up is historically low, this is facilitated through translated course materials, opportunities to complete assessments in Welsh, and classroom support provided by Welsh speaking staff working within the Education team. Welsh language courses are available to all prisoners on request, alongside a bilingual course on Welsh traditions and customs.

The number of contractual delays caused by late prisoner transport to court attributable to the Prisoner Escort and Custody Service (PECS) suppliers for Basildon, Essex and England between 2023 and 2025 are shown in the table below.

PECS performance remains consistently over 99%, and while even small numbers of delays can have visible impacts in busy courts, we are improving reporting through digital development of a new application, this will further enable PECS to ensure performance data is transparent and accurately reflects what is happening across the system. We value feedback from all stakeholders which enable PECS to ensure performance data is transparent and accurately reflects what is happening across the system.

We recognise the problems we inherited in prisoner transfer with delays occurring at prisons, en route between prison and court and at courts themselves in bringing prisoners to the dock. The Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending and I will chair an oversight body established to review prisoner transfer from end to end. This will monitor and drive performance improvements in prisoner transfer across the country.

We are working with the Department for Transport to issue guidance on PECS’ use of bus lanes to all local authorities. And in London, where traffic regularly causes delays, we are working closely with Transport for London (TfL) to reduce avoidable delays and keep the justice system moving.

The reoffending rates for adults with an index disposal of a community order was 36.4% in 2022/23 and 38.0% in 2023/24. The data can be found in the latest proven reoffending statistics release, in the annual tables here, in table C1a.

Studies have found that short custodial sentences of less than 12 months were associated with higher reoffending rates (approximately 4 percentage points higher) than when court orders of any length had been given (which includes both community orders and suspended sentence orders).

However, it is essential that community punishment works. The Sentencing Act 2026 includes a range of measures to make community punishment tougher. These include banning offenders from attending pubs, bars and clubs, as well as public events such as sports and concerts. The courts will also be able to prohibit an offender from driving as a punishment regardless of the offence they have committed. We have also introduced new tough restriction zones which will restrict offenders to a specific geographical area. These will be electronically monitored and are intended to serve not just as a punishment, but as an important tool to protect victims.

The Crown Court backlogs can cause defendants to spend longer time on remand. This Government is committed to pulling every lever we have – investment, reform and efficiency – so can we turn the tide on the backlog. The Government has invested significantly in the system, including funding unlimited sitting days so that the Crown Court can hear as many cases as possible next year. We have also introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill to enable much-needed reform of the criminal courts, and are leading a major efficiency drive, including the introduction of ‘blitz courts’ to get through the backlog.

The use of remand is a judicial matter, and there are well established processes for extending Custody Time Limits if needed. Applications must be approved by independent judges and defendants have the right to oppose any application.